Not sure about the 2011 vs P18, and at this point of my research, that point is picking the pepper out of the fly shit. I called it a 2011 because one of the reviews I read in TruthAboutGuns called it that, and I didn't really pay that much attention to the grip material to care, reference attached, 1st Paragraph, 2nd Sentence: http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2016/0 ... 0mm-1911s/ ---- also there are several youtube vids showing a STI 2011 mag fitting and cycling in the RIA Pro 6" Ultra HC 10mm.Reloaderguy wrote:By the way, the RIA pistol is not a "2011" pattern double stack, it is a Para P18. 2011 guns use a polymer grip and chassis and take specific 2011 pattern magazines. The 2011 magazines are the gold standard for double stack open race guns, P18 mags are somewhere between AIDS and Honda. They can be made to work, some work pretty well...some are a nightmare. Para was bought by Remington which seems to be prophetic since both have about the same level of poor quality.adeluca73 wrote:
Then I cam across the "Big Rock" from Rock Island Armory (RIA). A true double stack 16rnd 1911 (called a 2011) long slide competition race/pro gun inspired configuration. They are still over $1000, which is a lot for a RIA, but they are feature packed, and cost about half of a comparable spec'd gun of another "major" brand even though RIA has been making guns since the '40's, Here's a link to it:
http://armscor.com/firearms/pro-series/ ... 6-hc-10mm/
Also, because you've had a bad Remington gun doesn't mean they are all bad, and from reading your postings here, you're too bright to make such sweeping assertions. Similarly the near perfect history (with some notable exceptions from early 2000's) with the nearly 10 or so Remington's I've owned and currently own, are not a statistically significant sample to provide any z-hypothesis verified measured of confidence in their quality either. I have 3x M700s, pump 35Rem, 3x various 870s, 1100, 1187, 1100G3 (poor qual), 105CTi (poor qual), and a newly purchased wood stock V3. The new R51 and V3 have had years of R&D, millions of rounds of testing, and dozens of aerospace level mil-std type tesitng since they hired their new CEO from the LMMS aeronautics division. I've watched several Remington engineering documentaries, and read several engineering studies on Remington's new processes and company motto that they WILL NOT release a product until it's both over 99.9% reliable and is produced in sufficient quantities so all of their major distributors can field them at once. The work they did on the v2 of the R51 is astounding, and the way they mindfully ensured all the v1 R51 customers were completely taken care of is rarely seen. They announced the synthetic version of their 3" only version of the Versamx, called the V3 in SHOT '13, but didn't released the synthetic V3 until later in 2015 to do more production gun testing (millions more rounds), which was already after several yrs of testing and iterating on their already successful 3.5" Versamax, which uses the same M2 gas piston design, proven by the US military in combat for years. When they announced the wood stock model at Shot 2015, they didn't release the production guns until Dec 16 to verify small gas system and hand guard fitting changes. The V3 I have is a top notch semi auto that is attractive, light weight, points well, balances well, has a great tigger, and has been flawless for under $750. I have several $2500+ semis from "the big 3 European companies" that aren't a whole lot better, and a $5K Beretta competition O/U whose fit and finish isn't 10x better. No company is perfect, but Remington has demonstrated serious dedication to customers and fixing their lapses under the dereliction of Cerbeus leadership from 10-15 yrs ago, I would pump the bakes on denigrating Remington...I think we all should root for Rem and Colt to stay in business, it's good for more than the obvious reasons.